The Ron Paul Movement

reason ^ | July 16, 2007 | Jesse Walker

[Austin Willard Wright]

Great article.

[M203M4]

And the Islamonazis hate us because we are free, and therefore they support Ron Paul. Rudy Giuliani said so.

[SubGeniusX]

...Rudy (of all people) huffed and puffed on stage one evening in mock offense. He could have counter-argued RP ...

actually he couldn't ... cause RP was speakeing the truth

[God luvs America]

the cultists of the world thank you for your dedication...where are you in that video of ron paul supporters claiming 9-11 was an inside job???

[George W. Bush]

I personally know 350 + Ron Paul supporters. Of them, only 3 or 4 are “truthers”.

To my knowledge, of the large number of FReepers on our RP pinglist, only one has verged toward "truther" territory. He's now banned here at FR AFAIK and I haven't seen him lately. I saw him post a kind of "truther" thread at another of the FR-descended sites so I assumed that's why he got banned. He's still on our pinglist (and welcome to read our stuff) but JimRob isn't going to tolerate any "truther" discussions at FR. Nowhere in any FReepmails or on the forum itself have I read any "truther" statements from RP supporters. Management policy is plain on "truther" articles and seems fairly enforced.

[SubGeniusX]

Wow...
If only the current administration had taken heed ...

[George W. Bush]

I thought their descriptions of RP's campaign as "transpartisan", "idea-driven", and "has a life of its own" really focused on the appeal of the RP's message and support. And it explains the viral internet phenomenon that RP's campaign has become.

It's not about Ron Paul personally as much as it is about the ideas and policy goals he's speaking to. But it is his longstanding voting record as Dr. No that gives the campaign its credibility. Any candidate can say these things (I wish they all would). But only Dr. No has voted and spoken for decades to these same issues.

Of course, these threads usually turn into trollbait since so few FReepers seem to read the articles any more. Some days, I think we should just post titles and no articles and let people hallucinate their favorite attacks on the target de jour. That's what seems to happen any more. I really miss the pre-Bush FreeRepublic. We had some very sharp posters here then, not a letter or word or bit of punctuation escaped their attention.

[jrooney]

If need be yes. Slither back into your spider hole where all you Paulettes belong amongst the DU crowd, Move on idioits, sorosites, Cindy Sheehans, Michael Moores, Al Frankens, et al. Yes, that is the crowd that supports Ron Paul and you all are amongst them. Enjoy.

[jrooney]

" another Constitutionally illegal, undeclared war we can not win"

Cindy Sheehan is that you? That is who you sound like and what does that say for you? Not much LOSER.

[billbears]

Latest Gallup Poll. Rep. Paul at 3%...so much for that 0% somebody has been touting.

[BigTom85]

Is it a burden to the American people to police the world? No doubt. Is it a crime to have the power to make the world better but instead choose the “not my job” approach?

We have no business polincing the world. As a matter of fact, there is no constitutional obligation for us to do so. In fact, the founders actually spoke very strongly against us acting in this manner. They also spoke against the US signing onto alliances.

Let’s face it. This isn’t 1776. Ron Paul would’ve made a wonderful President two hundred years ago.

Agreed.... And he would make a fine one today.

The problem is, oceans don’t protect us anymore.

Forget about oceans. We can't even control what comes across the Rio Grande river on our southern border.

[Allegra]

Whatever, Snookums.

Stop stalking me and bothering me. You're getting rather tiresome now. You really think you can manipulate people with your games. Remember, we're not all as gullible as the people you apparently interact with on a regular basis.

Get a life. And a personality.

I won't be corresponding with you anymore, so give it your best, twisted, little shot, Honeybunch. I'm awarding you the last word - don't waste it. Don't let me down! LOL

[Puddleglum]

If need be yes. Slither back into your spider hole where all you Paulettes belong amongst the DU crowd, Move on idioits, sorosites, Cindy Sheehans, Michael Moores, Al Frankens, et al. Yes, that is the crowd that supports Ron Paul and you all are amongst them. Enjoy.

Gosh, that response was so vile I forgot the question I asked. Must have had something to do with promoting decency in the world. Oh yes, I asked if it was America's duty to rid the world of all thugs and tyrants (people who oppress other people). You said yes. Please name the next targets we should declare war on and when you plan to enlist.

[Jack Black]

It's about control of the oil patch. It always was. So was Gulf War I under Spook Daddy.

How many times do they have to come right out and state it baldly before you pull your head out and believe what they themselves have told you?

Oh, dear. You aren't one of those WMD-in-Iraq weirdos we still have here, are you? It was about a lot more than oil.

It's about the long running dream of the West of building a just world where states don't invade other states and nutjob leaders don't have a free hand to torture, rape and kill their subjects.

The lesson of WW2 was "don't let an obviously mad man with an Army run wild". Which leader do we denigrate in WW2? Chamberlain, who tried to ignore, then compromise with Hitler. Bush (I and II) both read the same history books as everyone else here on FR and in the USA and England.

Bush (I and II) were acting on the collective wisdom of the West, in pursuit of the Western organized dream of a powerful United Nations that could act to create and sustain Order in the world. As opposed to international relations based solely on power. (IE: The New World Order.)

With the fall of the Soviets the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait was the first test of an unconstrained (by the USSSR) UN, backed up by US muscle. It seemed to work.

It's only on the rocks of Iraqi Freedom that the problems inherent in this world view are showing.

[George W. Bush]

Bush (I and II) were acting on the collective wisdom of the West, in pursuit of the Western organized dream of a powerful United Nations that could act to create and sustain Order in the world. As opposed to international relations based solely on power. (IE: The New World Order.)

Bush I and all the GOP secretaries of state and national security advisers have opposed Bush II's policies. They have throughout this misbegotten adventure. None of them has supported it, publicly or in their writings. That is why they expelled Saddam during GW I but studiously avoided toppling him. They wisely avoided that which Bush II has led us into.

Since your premise is utterly flawed, there is no point in discussing your conclusions.

[from occupied ga]

See post #55

[George W. Bush]

Forget about oceans. We can't even control what comes across the Rio Grande river on our southern border.

Oh, yeah? But Iraq is going to have secure borders! We're sending over our BP to do the job. Isn't that good enough for all you whiners?

</sarcasm>

[That was a good retort you had...]

[SoldierDad]

My question would be, of the 19 hijackers on September 11th 2001, all were Saudis except for an Egyptian, one from the UAE, and a Lebanese national. Why did we not attack Saudi Arabia?

Let's see. Could it be that the 19 hijackers were Al Qaeda terrorists who, along with Bin Laden, were expatriated from Saudi Arabia? Could it be that they were all selected for the mission while training at terrorist training camps in Afghanistan and not Saudi Arabia? Hmmm. And in 18 months, we’ll be neck deep in the middle of another Constitutionally illegal, undeclared war we can not win and should not be fighting in Iran.

So, the fact that the U.S. Congress voted to give President Bush the power to engage in military operations in order to remove Saddam from power makes Iraq an Illegal war? Hmmmmm! These issues don't require a degree in Rocket Science to figure out. Just a little common sense. Oh, I'm sorry. I forgot.